There are two interpretations of the Creeds. It depends upon how you interpret the baptism of desire (BOD) and being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I). If BOD and I.I are interpreted rationally or irrationally, the meaning of the Creeds change. The Rational or Irrational Premise, creates orthodoxy or heresy. With Feeneyism or Cushingism, the conclusion of the Creeds is traditional or non traditional.
Not only the Creeds change with the premise chosen but also Vatican Council II. We can interpret the baptism of desire (LG 14) and being saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16) with the Rational or Irrational Premise.Then the Conclusion of Vatican Council II is either a continuity or a rupture with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).
In the same way EENS itself is Feeneyite or Cushingite. When we interpret the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, with the rational premise, then it supports EENS Feeneyite.This is EENS with BOD and I.I not being being exceptions . When we interpret BOD and I.I with the Irrational Premise then there is EENS with BOD and I.I being visible examples of salvation outside the Church in the present times. It is wrongly inferred that BOD and I.I are visible.They become practical exceptions for EENS.
NICENE CREED
1.So when the Nicene Creed states :‘We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins’ , we can interpret this line with the Rational or Irrational Premise, with Feeneyism or with Cushingism. The conclusion will be traditional or non traditional, orthodox or heretical.
APOSTLES CREED
2.When we say in the Apostles Creed,’ "I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints", it can be interpreted with the Rational or Irrational Premise, with Feeneyism or Cushingism. So for you, does the Holy Spirit teach the Catholic Church today that outside the Church there is no salvation or outside the Church there is salvation ?
ATHANASIUS CREED
3.We can read in the same way, the Athanasius Creed when it states : ‘Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.’
With the Rational Premise we are saying that everyone needs to be a member of the Catholic Church for salvation and there are no known exceptions. With the Irrational Premise we are saying that everyone needs to be a member of the Catholic Church for salvation but there are known exceptions.This is irrational Cushingism.It is contradictory. It does not make sense.
Catholics in general, including the popes, cardinals, bishops- and the traditionalists , interpret the Creeds with the irrational premise.They assume there are visible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance. This is an objective mistake.
CDF 1949 LETTER A POLITICAL-LEFT DOCUMENT
The objective mistake, the New Theology, has come into the Church from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.The Letter was kept hidden for about three years before it was made public. The CDF Letter was part of the political-Left agenda to eliminate the dogma EENS in the Catholic Church. It supported heresy and schism with its New Theology.The New Theology says outside the Church there is known salvation; visible cases of non Catholics saved without Catholic faith and the baptism of water. The philosophical foundation for the New Theology is the Irrational Premise.
PREMISE DETERMINES ORTHODOXY OF CREEDS
Posts
